RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.

I was just looking at that birthm Yes it certainly fits though no mothers maiden name.

I usually assume that if the mother is unmarried it might give no maiden name or sometimes the given name and maiden name are the same. But as he gives his father as Charles it would look like Wood/s is his fathers name. I will send for this certificate and see.

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.

I usually assume that if the mother is unmarried it might give no maiden name or sometimes the given name and maiden name are the same. But as he gives his father as Charles it would look like Wood/s is his fathers name. I will send for this certificate and see.

It was extremely common for illegitimate persons to put a wrong name, or a cobbled together name, of a father on a Marriage record. For example, sometimes they put the first name of a stepfather or a grandfather, but not the surname, instead just using the name they were born with (eg WOODS)

He married the women he had been living with since at least 1901 in 1933! She was in reality still married to another chap but left him for Arthur around 1899. I can only summise that it took that long to get a divorce in order to marry Arthur.

Prior to around WW1, Divorce in England was rare, expensive and difficult - even for those in the upper classes. Could it be rather, that the legal spouse only died around 1933?

Yes I agree that him giving his fathers name as Charles may not be reliable. He hasn't been honest on census returns stating Mary Ann was his wife on both 1901 and 1911, he even says they have been married for 18yrs.I too now wonder if her first husband dies around 1933 hence the marriage.Thank you for the possible 1871 census entry, i will keep that on file and see what the birth cert turn up.Thank you for your assistance,

With the address off the 1868 Birth Cert and the 1871 Census being as good as a match with Edward Street ( the house number 17 or 18 isn't an issue, people often moved to different dwellings in the same street; the addition of 'Sydney Terrace' on the Birth cert also isn't an issue) - I think you could be pretty much assured the 1868 birth cert is for the boy in the 1871 Census.

As to whether he is also your g-gf, it's looking very reasonable to say he is.The name, with the middle name - Arthur William, is a match.The name Charles given as his father of your g-gf's marriage lines - matches the father figure in the 1871 Census.

I would be looking for an Emma WOOD, being either a daughter of Charles and Mary Ann, or maybe a younger sister of Mary Ann - or as outlined below an illegitimate daughter of Mary Annů.

In the 1881 Census you've found and mentioned in Deptford:RG11 Piece 705/ Folio/ 101/ Page52the boys Robert and Arthur, and now listed as sons age 14 and 12.

The age of Robert in the 1871 (5) and 1881 (14) Census, doesn't match the 1863 Birth registration (I'd been hoping the 1871 Census age was a mistake) but I'd still be curious to see if the 1863 Birth is the same mother as the 1868 for Arthur?

Charles and Mary Ann are already found in Deptford in 1851, 1871 and 1881. The only child with them in those 3 Census is a son named William (aged 1 in 1851, age 21 in 1871 and age 31 in 1881).

Family History Help

All Census Lookups are Crown Copyright, National Archives for academic and non-commercial research purposes only.
RootsChat.com cannot be held responsible directly or indirectly for the messages or content posted by others. Inline images in messages are the copyright of the respective linked sites.